Certain disputations of right to sacraments, and the true nature of visible Christianity defending…

What ever the Faith professed be, If you say your Profession is required propter se, for the matter of the sign, and not for the formality and use of signifying, it were not only groundless, but a reproachful ascribing that to God, which we would not ascribe to the silliest man or woman about us, that hath the free use of Reason. And if the Profession be given, and taken (and so required) not propter se materially, but ut signum mentis, for the signifying of our minds; then sure I need not dig deep into Scripture or Reason, to prove that both the Reason and Charity of the minister is here to be Employed, to judge whether indeed it do signify the mans mind according to his pretences, or not. It grieveth me for the Churches sake, to read Mr. Blake's words of the Ministers he meets with: for if they do scarce any of them so much regard the probability of the Parents Regeneration in the administration of that Sacrament, then they either Baptize upon an apparent Lye (if the Parent profess saving Faith, when he hath not the least probability of it); or else they take up with the Profession of another species of Faith (as Mr. Blake doth.) And I crave their patient sober enquiry, Whether that be not to make another species of Baptism and of visible Christianity? and also, whether they have yet well discerned and determined what that Faith is that must be profest, and whether the world have ever yet seen an exact or satisfactory definition or description of it? and where? and in what words? and also whether they have not the same uncertainty of the sincerity of that lower Faith in the Professors, as of true saving Faith? and consequently, Whether Mr. Blake's doctrine have delivered them from difficulties, or ensnared them? I crave of all those Reverend Brethren whom Mr. ⟨p. 9⟩Black meets with, and are guilty of what he chargeth them with, that they would once more consider the matter.

What ever the Faith professed be, If you say your Profession is required propter se, for the matter of the sign, and not for the formality and use of signifying, it were not only groundless, but a reproachful ascribing that to God, which we would not ascribe to the silliest man or woman about us, that hath the free use of Reason. And if the Profession be given, and taken (and so required) not propter se materially, but ut signum mentis, for the signifying of our minds; then sure I need not dig deep into Scripture or Reason, to prove that both the Reason and Charity of the minister is here to be Imployed, to judge whether indeed it do signifie the mans mind according to his pretences, or not. It grieveth me for the Churches sake, to read Mr. Blake's words of the Ministers he meets with: for if they do scarce any of them so much regard the probability of the Parents Regeneration in the administration of that Sacrament, then they either Baptize upon an apparent Lye (if the Parent profess saving Faith, when he hath not the least probability of it); or else they take up with the Profession of another species of Faith (as Mr. Blake doth.) And I crave their patient sober enquiry, Whether that be not to make another species of Baptism and of visible Christianity? and also, whether they have yet well discerned and determined what that Faith is that must be profest, and whether the world have ever yet seen an exact or satisfactory definition or description of it? and where? and in what words? and also whether they have not the same uncertainty of the sincerity of that lower Faith in the Professors, as of true saving Faith? and consequently, Whether Mr. Blakes doctrine have delivered them from difficulties, or ensnared them? I crave of all those Reverend Brethren whom Mr.